Have recognized the reality that a hermit is a hermit in the Church if canonically approved. Dom Jean Leclercq also writes through the translations of Bl. Paul Giustiniani as to why a hermit must have the stamp of approval of the Church in order to progress in this vocation. However, in the French Bishop's revision of Canon 603 on the eremetical life, one in this vocation may live the life without canonical approval. In that case, however, one should not refer to oneself as a hermit.
I submitted a request to my Bishop, with the approval of my spiritual director. Actually, my s.d. did not realize that one must request being consecrated as a religious eremitic in the Diocese. He said, "Why can't you just live it?" Well, of course, I can--or rather, I can try to. But, it will be lived out without the graces which come through the Church for the consecrated religious. God will provide the graces necessary, however, to the state to which He calls me. I accept that the graces may not be quite the same. How could they be? It is as God wills.
The Bishop has my letter of request, and I have not heard anything from him yet. This could take several months or may be delegated to the Vicar General for consideration and research. The eremitical life is not common, and many priests and probably Bishops may not be cognizant of the details and forms of canonical approval of a religious solitary.
Now, I do not expect to be consecrated. Perhaps I will need an annulment since I converted after a divorce and will not remarry. But the divorce is out there, in the distant past. Also, how I consider myself, to grow and learn in this life to which I am chosen by God, may be as the maidservant of the Handmaid of the Lord, or as a religious solitary, or whatever God decides to call me. Maybe nothing. Yet, it is well for me to focus on at least maidservant, as this helps me be formed into the life of silence, solitude, slowness and the rest of the s'. It is true that my angel did say that God had chosen me for the hermit life--and used the word "hermit" and none other. So, we shall see in time what the Bishop determines.
In the meantime, I continue to discern the living out of the life, not only the internals but also still the externals. Both together. For example, I am an Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist (aka Eucharistic Minister as incorrectly termed by many). There is an appreciation dinner for Cathedral volunteers. While I think we should appreciate God for allowing us to volunteer--to have the health and wits and for His giving us the Church--I am discerning if this is a function to which a "hermit" would attend. Dom Leclercq says that a hermit must be socialized, but is this a necessary socialization? It is a Cathedral function but thus far I have contained myself to worship functions: Masses and Holy Hours and the Bishop's Jubilee celebration.
If I do go to the dinner, it will have to be as an assignment: to observe, listen and keep nose to the ground. I would observe others with the specific task of not criticizing but of seeing their good qualities and contrasting these goodnesses to my own faults and weaknesses. Or, to simply see only their goodnesses without criticism. Otherwise, I might not go at all.
As a kind of post script, a seminarian has written regarding the thought that one should not be an extra-ordinary minister of Holy Communion because only a priest should touch the Blessed Sacrament. My questioning of this ministry in the Church to be the possibility of being too visible for a hermit and had not to do with touching the Host. Actually, I hold the Cup of the Precious Blood when I serve. A quote by St. Thomas Aquinas was given as argument against being an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion.
"Out of reverence towards this Sacrament (Blessed Sacrament), nothing touches it but when it is consecrated" - St. Thomas Aquinas in Summa, Pt III Q, Q2 Art. 3
I am not an apologist but in this quote it seems to actually say that nothing touches the Host but when it is consecrated. Yes, when it is consecrated. Once it is consecrated, what then? Surely He is touched; or rather, He touches us. He touches our tongues when we receive Him, and the Church has said that hands may touch and be touched by Christ in the Host. I do not try to second-guess the Church, or to pass judgment, when the Church determines and makes a decree. In individual parishes, yes, there can be abuses; but also there may not be abuses. I would have to see a Church document that states that only a priest may touch the Host, and no one else after the Host is consecrated, under any circumstance.
However, I can appreciate the seminarian's prayerful decision for him to not be an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion, if he feels it is personally wrong for him to touch the Host. It is not wrong by Holy Mother Church's determinations, from any documentation I have ever read.
In this case, the Church has allowed for the use of Extra-ordinary Ministers of Holy Communion and also has allowed for the Faithful to receive Him in the hand. I personally only receive on the tongue, although once a priest with Parkinson's asked me to receive in the hand, as he feared dropping Our Lord. While it is conceivable that some priests could over-use laity for assisting with distributing Communion, I cannot make that call, for I don't know what criteria used in individual parishes when they are deciding.
Yes, I personally am quite willing to wait in line longer, if there were to be only priests and deacons allowed to offer Jesus to the Faithful; but the fact remains that the Church has spoken on this matter, for now, and it is not wrong, then, to assist as an Extra-ordinary Minister of Holy Communion. In that, it would be wrong for me to not help when the priest asks for help. The Cathedral has this organized for so many to offer the Precious Blood and one person to offer His Body (and this not utilized when an additional priest there to offer the Hosts). People come in four lines, and thus eight are utilized. It is not my position to decide otherwise; it is decided by the Bishop and Rector. Thus, if help is needed, then help is offered in charity and by decree of the Church, with no wrong being done.
I pray this helps in what is my dilemma as an (incomplete) hermit, in discerning the service to the Church. In the guides for the eremitic life, service to the Church is optional. It is for me a question of what is too visible, not in what is allowed by the Church and of service as it stands for now. Perhaps when we have more priests again, laity will not be asked to help distribute Christ's Body and Blood. Surely not, for when in some Masses, there are many priests, laity are not utilized.
